Abstract:Objectives: With the widespread clinical application of prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), there has been an increasing demand for lesion detection and accurate diagnosis in prostate MR, which relies heavily on satisfactory image quality. Focusing on the primary sequences involved in Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS), this study have evaluated common quality issues in clinical practice (such as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), artifacts, boundaries, and enhancement). The aim of the study was to determine the impact of image quality on clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) detection, positive predictive value (PPV) and radiologist's diagnosis in different sequences and prostate zones. Methods: This retrospective study included 306 patients who underwent prostate MRI with definitive pathological reports from February 2021 to December 2022. All histopathological specimens were evaluated according to the recommendations of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP). An ISUP Grade Group ≥ 2 was considered as csPCa. Three radiologists from different centers respectively performed a binary classification assessment of image quality in the following ten aspects: (1) T2WI in the axial plane: SNR, prostate boundary conditions, the presence of artifacts; (2) T2WI in the sagittal or coronal plane: prostate boundary conditions; (3) DWI: SNR, delineation between the peripheral and transition zone, the presence of artifacts, the matching of DWI and T2WI images; (4) DCE: the evaluation of obturator artery enhancement, the evaluation of dynamic contrast enhancement. Fleiss' Kappa was used to determine the inter-reader agreement. Wilson's 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was used to calculate PPV. Chi-square test was used to calculate statistical significance. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: High-quality images had a higher csPCa detection rate (56.5% to 64.3%) in axial T2WI, DWI, and DCE, with significant statistical differences in SNR in axial T2WI (p 0.002), the presence of artifacts in axial T2WI (p 0.044), the presence of artifacts in DWI (p < 0.001), and the matching of DWI and T2WI images (p < 0.001). High-quality images had a higher PPV (72.5% to 78.8%) and showed significant statistical significance in axial T2WI, DWI, and DCE. Additionally, we found that PI-RADS 3 (24.0% to 52.9%) contained more low-quality images compared to PI-RADS 4-5 (20.6% to 39.3%), with significant statistical differences in the prostate boundary conditions in axial T2WI (p 0.048) and the presence of artifacts in DWI (p 0.001). Regarding the relationship between csPCa detection and image quality in different prostate zones, this study found that significant statistical differences were only observed between high- (63.5% to 75.7%) and low-quality (30.0% to 50.0%) images in the peripheral zone (PZ). Conclusion: Prostate MRI quality may have an impact on the diagnostic performance. The poorer image quality is associated with lower csPCa detection rates and PPV, which can lead to an increase in radiologist's ambiguous diagnosis (PI-RADS 3), especially for the lesions located at PZ.

Picture Perfect: The Status of Image Quality in Prostate MRI

Impact of prostate MRI image quality on diagnostic performance for clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa)

PI-QUAL version 2: an update of a standardised scoring system for the assessment of image quality of prostate MRI

Prostate MRI quality: clinical impact of the PI-QUAL score in prostate cancer diagnostic work-up

Deep Learning-Based T2-Weighted MR Image Quality Assessment and Its Impact on Prostate Cancer Detection Rates

AI-based automated evaluation of image quality and protocol tailoring in patients undergoing MRI for suspected prostate cancer

Multiparametric Prostate MRI Accuracy of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (v2.1) Scores 4 and 5: The Influence of Image Quality According to the Prostate Imaging Quality Score

ESR Essentials: using the right scoring system in prostate MRI—practice recommendations by ESUR

Convolutional Neural Networks for Automated Classification of Prostate Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based on Image Quality

Deep learning-based image quality assessment: impact on detection accuracy of prostate cancer extraprostatic extension on MRI

Evaluating Prostate Cancer: The Diagnostic Impact of MRI and Its Relationship With Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS)-Guided Biopsy

Tasks for artificial intelligence in prostate MRI

Quantitative Prostate MRI, From the AJR Special Series on Quantitative Imaging

Practical aspects of prostate MRI: hardware and software considerations, protocols, and patient preparation

[Advances in artificial intelligence-assisted MRI radiomics in the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer]

Assessment of a fully-automated diagnostic AI software in prostate MRI: Clinical evaluation and histopathological correlation

Enhancing prostate MRI expertise: educational strategies for radiologists

Artificial intelligence for prostate MRI: open datasets, available applications, and grand challenges

A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Unanswered Questions

Artificial Intelligence Compared to Radiologists for the Initial Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer on Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Studies

Improving Prostate MR Image Quality in Practice – Initial results from the ACR Prostate MR Image Quality Improvement Collaborative